Response To Sher

[Amandeep Hindustani]

You have to understand the mentality of a section of the Hindu Punjabis to understand why they consider Sant Bhindranwale a terrorist. They are deeply insecure and it is their actions that have made them insecure. You only have to look at the history of Punjab after 1700. It is Sikh history. Buffoons like that Hindustani guy have to make outrageous claims about Bhagat Singh being a 'Hindu Punjabi warrior' just to give himself something to be proud off in the last 300 years. The Sikhs were at best 5-10% of Punjab and were yet able to control large areas of Punjab and not only this but large areas which were populated by Muslims. They created the first Punjabi state since the Muslim invasions. Look at this from the point of view of the Hindus. They were equal in number to the Muslims at that time and yet the best they could do was to have a few Hindu chaudharies. Where are the Hindu Misldars? The times were ripe for adventurous men to create their ow rule in the areas where at least their own co-religionists were in a majority. The Hindu Rajputs in the Hills tried to extend their rule in those troubled times and the Hindu Jats in Haryana were able to create their own rule. So where is the Hindu Punjabi in all this? Having a history where you are ruled by one minority for 700 years and another minority for another 100 years cannot but make the Hindu Punjabi a deeply insecure people. This insecurity continued during the British rule as they lost large numbers of converts to the Sikhs. They were viewed as cowardly and lost the last remnants of a martial class amongst them (Hindu Jats) to the Sikhs during British times. So now all the Hindu Punjabi have is the so-called higher castes, Brahmin, Khatri/Arora and Banias and the lower castes. The Hindus have lost their lower castes already to Raviassia religion and most of the Hindu lower castes have a mixture of Sikh beliefs along with Hindu beliefs.

Their own sense of unity can only come out of treating the Sikh majority in Punjab as their enemy. Hence the way the Bandar Sena and other Sikh organisations hate Sant Bhindranwale. Because Santji is a Sikh hero then he has to be hated to create a unity in the Hindu Punjabi. Because of this enmity anything that is to the detriment of the Sikhs has to be to the advantage of the Hindu Punjabi. So for this reason they distribute laddos after Bluestar. Going further back they have to hate the Punjabi language because they Sikhs love and care for that language.

After 1947 the Hindu Punjab who for the last 1000 years had been a slave to all suddenly became the ruling class in Punjab. When you put insecure people in power then do not be surprised if they act strangely. They disowned Punjabi and fought tooth and nail to deny Punjabi language the state to which it was entitled. After their actions these frustrated and envious people are now minorities in all the three states that came out of East Punjab. They play second fiddle to the Sikhs in Punjab, the Paharis in Himachal and the Hindu Jats in Haryana. If they had used their brains they would have been a majority in the Punjabi state which would have included Northern Haryana and Kangra-Una areas of Himachal. So after this massive own goal all they have as their reason for existence in Punjab is their enmity for the Sikhs. That's why they hate the Sikhs and Sant Bhindranwale.

We have to understand the mentality of the Khalistanis and Pakistanis as well. Despite their best efforts they could not overun Hinduism. Like they did in Africa, Middle East and elsewhere. The inferiority complex arises from the fact that both communities cannot compete with the Hindu in pretty much any sphere. Hence, the simplest most logical way is to kill or drive them out. Why compete when you take your ball and go home. This leaves them grasping at straws - Ie: The hindu cannot or will not fight.

But that is fading as well. Because the Hindu is starting to put up battlefield victories. So, what is left? The fear of being absorbed by Hinduism drives these two communities to absolute craziness.

As for slavery: Here is a statistical evidence for our khalistani friends that drives them crazy. Check it out.

Sikhism has been around for 545 years. In that time they have had independence only 50 years. A simple calculation below. Hmmm.

50/545 = 91.74%

So, our friends have been slaves for nearly 92% of their history.

The rate of slavery = 92%

Edited June 9, 2014 by Amandeep Hindustani

[Guest]

But that is fading as well. Because the Hindu is starting to put up battlefield victories. So, what is left? The fear of being absorbed by Hinduism drives these two communities to absolute craziness.

As for slavery: Here is a statistical evidence for our khalistani friends that drives them crazy. Check it out.

Sikhism has been around for 545 years. In that time they have had independence only 50 years. A simple calculation below. Hmmm.

50/545 = 91.74%

So, our friends have been slaves for nearly 92% of their history.

The rate of slavery = 92%

Sikhi being absorbed by hinduism..what a joke..every kumb mela or jor mela- nirmala scholars initiate more hindus from all walks of life into traditional sikhi fold give them free vidya, medicine all the help ...hindus bhramins who gone curropt totally despise that..wait a minute there is more..Hindu bhramins who have gone curropt also getting shafted right, left and center by westerners who are literally translate all vedas and upanishads, opened up yoga schools made it widely available, putting them out of business of herding sheeps to control and power..then come nihangs who uphold khastriya dharam- do jhatka infront of them, do anti clock wise pakarama ...all of that act by mysterious power to humble down obnoxious condescending patronizing curropt bhramin pricks....no race is superior be it jatt or bhramin or kshatriya or dharam is superior any dharam which promotes meditate on lords name is best....so get over yourself ..!!

[tonyhp32]

We never denied that we or certain segments of our population made alliances with known enemies of the country for their own benefit. It happens even today. Then again we don't portray ourselves, like you, as people who did everything for this civilization, did nothing wrong etc..

Traitorous actions are not just part of the christians, muslims, hindus and others. But part and parcel of the sikh community as well.

You claimed the Sikhs joined the British in 1857 because of they 'goodies' they had got from the British. So come on what goodies did the Sikhs get before 1857?

Sikhs as all nations have a right to have alliances with the enemies of their enemies. Sikhs aren't enamoured by the artificial creation of the British called India.

[chatanga1]

You are wrong on mandela. the World never called Nelson mandela a terrorist some British conservatives did. he is considered an icon of peace and revered but JSB....!!!

as far as siding with the British or any other force is concerned - really bad history Sikhs have. Unfortunately, this history goes back right to Gurus days.

i think you will find that more than just the conservatives called mandela a terrorist.

the bottom line is that any govt will accept the views of any govt it wishes to do trade with. india buys a lot of goods from britain, usa etc, which is why they have accepted the indians propoganda. the indian govt has always used trade as blackmail into getting other countries to support it's propoganda.

what about the hindus that sided with the invaders and unleashed hell for millions of their own people?

[chatanga1]

We never denied that we or certain segments of our population made alliances with known enemies of the country for their own benefit. It happens even today. Then again we don't portray ourselves, like you, as people who did everything for this civilization, did nothing wrong etc..

if we Sikhs thought that we had done nothing wrong, we wouldnt be in the situation we are in now. Of course we have done many things wrong, and no Sikh on this forum says otherwise.

[chatanga1]

Its funny all those you things you cite also apply to your as well. I mean how did a mere 50,000 Hindu troops just take over a state filled with millions of warriors.

what time are you talking about here?

[chatanga1]

My opinion, Sikhi needs to go back to the earlier Gurus days where everyone was welcome. insistence on 5 kakkars would lead to the eventual death of the faith.

Your opinion or your master's opinion?

[chatanga1]

Never said Sikhs don't have a right to freedom. But the right of the indigenous/original people to have a say in the affairs of the Punjab, and its future is equal to or above your majority argument. And you are not the original inhabitants of this land. The original are the Hindus. And if you add the Hindu Punjabi population across Northern India even your majority argument falls apart.

If you ask the Moolnivasis they say that you Hindus aren't the original inhabitants of this land either.

either way you look at it, you have advanced an extremely poor argument. The people haven't changed, Only their religion has, so if you are correct, the Sikhs have every right to claim the "original" status, if the moolnivasis are right, you are a foreigner in their land, occupying it illegally.

[Amandeep Hindustani]

If you ask the Moolnivasis they say that you Hindus aren't the original inhabitants of this land either.

either way you look at it, you have advanced an extremely poor argument. The people haven't changed, Only their religion has, so if you are correct, the Sikhs have every right to claim the "original" status, if the moolnivasis are right, you are a foreigner in their land, occupying it illegally.

When the moolnivasis make a pitch for the status of "original inhabitants" along with the neanderthals, homo-erectus and others then we can have this discussion.

[Amandeep Hindustani]

My religion argument is supposed to be sarcastic because Mr. Tony thinks 1 religious community should have Punjab. Just reminded him that others have made sacrifices, had kingdoms and lived on this land way before his community.

[DSG]

Regarding SANT Jarnail Singh Ji Bhindrawla , lets take a step backwards

Question for sangat who thinks he was a "TERRORIST " , start off with basic questions, then take it from there

1. Why do you think SANT Jarnail Singh Ji Bhindrawala stood up in the 1980's , what was his motives ?

[Amandeep Hindustani]

Sikhi being absorbed by hinduism..what a joke..every kumb mela or jor mela- nirmala scholars initiate more hindus from all walks of life into traditional sikhi fold give them free vidya, medicine all the help ...hindus bhramins who gone curropt totally despise that..wait a minute there is more..Hindu bhramins who have gone curropt also getting shafted right, left and center by westerners who are literally translate all vedas and upanishads, opened up yoga schools made it widely available, putting them out of business of herding sheeps to control and power..then come nihangs who uphold khastriya dharam- do jhatka infront of them, do anti clock wise pakarama ...all of that act by mysterious power to humble down obnoxious condescending patronizing curropt bhramin pricks....no race is superior be it jatt or bhramin or kshatriya or dharam is superior any dharam which promotes meditate on lords name is best....so get over yourself ..!!

What you cite is happening unfortunately with all religions not just Hinduism. Believe it or not religion is big business. And I do not think I was talking about caste either. And I'm happy that westerners are opening up yoga schools, translating etc. it means more converts, fresh ideas which are the life blood of any community.

And there is fear that Hinduism will absorb Sikhism as its done for eons with others. I'm not saying its going to happen but there is fear. And I don't think I ever seen Hindus being bothered by one of their own converting to sikhism. My own massar is a turban wearing sikh, as is my chacha.

Never bothered us.

[Amandeep Hindustani]

Somebody mentioned Nelson Mandela and terrorism. Why? Read below make your own judgment.

As leader and member of the African National Congress, Mr. Mandela and his followers invented the "necklace" which consists of taking a person putting a tire around him and burning him alive. Did it to hundreds if not thousands of fellow africans.

[chatanga1]

When the moolnivasis make a pitch for the status of "original inhabitants" along with the neanderthals, homo-erectus and others then we can have this discussion.

yet you are making the same pitch, in the same discussion.

[chatanga1]

Just reminded him that others have made sacrifices, had kingdoms and lived on this land way before his community.

Accepted.

Now after the Sikh community came into existence, what have the Hindu community done, except create division, sell their mother TWICE, (land and language), helped the British destroy the last independent indigenous rule, tarnish the image of the Sikhs nationally and internationally, and many other vile acts, that go beyond the pale of humanity?

[chatanga1]

Moolnivasis...aa ki fraud aa? haha moolis are figment of leftist historians' collective imagination nothing else.

by the same token, hindus being the original inhabitants of Panjab is a figment of rightwing hindus.

[chatanga1]

listen to nihals show from friday, the favourite bbc pet of the indian govt, mark tully has said that the ASR was not extremist or separatist in any way.

hindu brothers have claimed it for so long, maybe they can beleive their pet if they can't believe their brothers.

[chatanga1]

Congress propped him up against Akalis. He campaigned for Congress candidates and also fielded his candidates against Akalis in SGPC elections.

can you provide any proof for this?

[chatanga1]

Not really. The language of many Hindu scriptures - sanskrit originated in Saptsindhu (land of seven rivers i.e. Punjab) and so did their oldest scriptures vedas. We cannot find reference of any other community from ancient times.

books written by the hindus for the hindus. how would you find any reference to other communities? and what reference would you be looking for?

"we, invaded their lands, and took over them".

Edited June 9, 2014 by chatanga1

[chatanga1]

One of the 'Moolniwasis' Rishi Balmiki wrote Ramayana in Sanskrit. Hunn khush?

sure he was a moolnivasi?

didn't Lord Ram make it a point to kill such people who were praying in his kingdom?

Edited June 9, 2014 by chatanga1

[chatanga1]

Extremist Sikhs cite this book often"

Soft Target: The Real Story Behind the Air India Disaster - Second Edition

By Zuhair Kashmeri, Brian McAndrew Page 40.

Amritsar Mrs. Gandhi's Last Battle By Mark Tully, Sathish Jacob

Crafting State-Nations: India and Other Multinational Democracies By Alfred Stepan, Juan J. Linz, Yogendra Yadav - page 94

Democracy and Discontent: India's Growing Crisis of Governability By Atul Kohli Page 359

Terrorism in Context edited by Martha Crenshaw and many more.

Hunn khush?

literary references are not proof.

although of course you would try and pull that card, but what if a sikh were to provide any literary reference to the killing of minorities by the ravan state, it would be all "khaliban/extremists/terrorists" rubbish.

[chatanga1]

No, Lord Rama did not kill any such people. He in fact ate a 'moolnavasi' Shabri's jhoothe berr.

in one version maybe. but he definitely killed a moolnivasi for having the audacity to pray.

[chatanga1]

But it would be grossly wrong to quote from Khali websites.

Why? How do you know what their credentials are, to make such a judgement?

The fact that they are politically opposite to you means that cannot be trusted to write unbiased facts?

[tonyhp32]

This is a outrageously dishonest thinking. You are talking about "selling "mother, EXTREMIST (who were a minority, I am not painting the whole community as traitors) Sikhs cut that mother into three pieces (Punjabi Suba) and eventually waged a war against her (khalistan movement). Rotten traitors like Sandhwalia brothers, malwa lackeys like patiala, nabha faridkot rajas were responsible for bringing down Sikh empire. Guess who was the last man standing against British forces - Dewan Mulraj. Guess who was sent to defeat him by the British- Sher Singh Atariwala who was one of Maharaj Ranjit Singh's jarnails just a few years earlier.

Mulraj was a victim of circumstances, his troops killed the British officers sent to replace him. He revolted because he had no other option otherwise his soldiers would have strung him up as well. Mulraj was not the last man standing, it was Sher Singh Attariwala and his father. The Mulraj revolt was technically a revolt against the Khalsa Raj as the British according to the treaty of Bhyrolwal were the regents acting on behalf of the Maharaja. Sher Singh went to enforce the rule of the Maharaja and when he realised what the British plans were he revolted. Multan was always a sideshow, the fiercest fighting took place in the Chenab-Jhelum river areas.

The Malwa Maharajas were lackeys of the British and their interests lay in either the status quo or a British takeover of the Punjab. States such as Jind were lukewarm in their support of the British and the Maharaja of Ladwa joined the Khalsa army as did many of the Sikhs of Malwa who used to waylay the British stragglers and kill them.

Now the question is where are the Hindu Punjab Maharajas in all this? Nowhere because they did not exist!

You claim that the Sikhs cut their mother into three but most of the areas that became Haryana and Himachal were never Punjabi speaking and had either become a part of Punjab because of the Sikh conquest (Kangra ) or been added to Punjab by the British as in the southern Haryana districts. What the Punjabi Hindus did by their betrayal is was to take Punjabi speaking areas such as Ambala, Una, Sirsa, Fatehabad from the Punjab and into the Hindi and Pahari speaking states. It was your people that cut their mother into three!

[Amandeep Hindustani]

in one version maybe. but he definitely killed a moolnivasi for having the audacity to pray.

Let me correct you. He killed the so called moolnivasi for praying for the wrong reason. Then again Sri Rama also killed a Brahmin (Ravin) on instruction from his brahmin guru. Befriended a local adivasi community (hanuman, amrik, sugreev) and ate food from the hand of Shabri also a moolnivasi. Then again the entire Ramayan was written by a moolnivasi.

Shri Rama seems to kill or not kill people based on their action, and not caste.